Talk:Jim Schmitt

I am editing this article as someone with a professional connection to the subject. I have made every effort to follow WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, and WP:V standards. All additions are sourced to published, third-party, reliable sources. I have not removed existing cited content, including the campaign finance section. I welcome neutral editors to review these changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rauglothgor (talk • contribs) 20:19, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Following my earlier COI disclosure: I am proposing/adding one additional sourced subsection on national engagement and intergovernmental collaboration during Schmitt's mayoral tenure, using published sources and keeping the existing campaign-finance section unchanged. Neutral review is welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rauglothgor (talk • contribs) 18:37, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

I have restored two items pertaining to Mayor Schmitt which have been recently deleted because no reason was given for deleting them. New wikipedia users should be aware that it is proper procedure to include a brief descrition of changes in the fill-in box on the change page, and for deletions to state on the discussion page why an item is being deleted. Even if factual errors are found, it is still proper to explain how and why.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vinceipierce (talk • contribs).

I have re-deleted the information added by a user which are obviously slanted to oppose the administration of Mayor Schmitt. As this is supposed to be encyclopedia quality, additions should be factually stated rather than editorial styled. To see how such information could be added without bias, I suggest the reader consult the articles of high profile candidates such as John Kerry or George Bush. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sortsa03 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Jim has a younger sister named Leah who I dated back in high school. Supposedly I was one of the coolest guys she ever met. Rumors have it that word of me spread like wild-fire throughout the female species. Rumors which I can easily affirm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.110.141 (talk) 13:47, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jim Schmitt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006200855/http://www.wiscities.org/newsletter57.htm to http://www.wiscities.org/newsletter57.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100526081853/http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/mayors_past/mayor_schmitt.html to http://www.ci.green-bay.wi.us/mayors_past/mayor_schmitt.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:45, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

The user below has a request that an edit be made to Jim Schmitt. That user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest. Summary of request: Review whether the infobox party field and Wisconsin Republicans category are supported with appropriate BLP sourcing The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 662 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies.

I have a previously disclosed professional connection to Jim Schmitt, so I am raising this here for neutral editor review rather than making the change directly.

The article currently lists Schmitt's party as Republican in the infobox and includes , but the article body does not appear to contain an inline source directly supporting personal party affiliation. The article also states that Green Bay mayoral elections are conducted on a nonpartisan basis.

I think this creates a BLP sourcing and weight issue. Schmitt's mayoral office and elections were officially nonpartisan; Wisconsin city ballots do not carry party designations for city offices; and Wisconsin does not have voter party registration. At the same time, some sources have described Schmitt as Republican or moderate Republican. Those are different concepts: official ballot status, voter registration, personal ideology, and party affiliation should not be collapsed into one unexplained infobox label.

Relevant sources:

• Wisconsin Stat. § 5.60(3)(am): "No party designation shall appear on the official ballot for city offices." https://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/chapter-5/section-5-60/
• U.S. Election Assistance Commission: "Wisconsin does not have political party registration." https://www.eac.gov/taxonomy/term/18401
• WBEZ, 2008: Schmitt said, "I'm not registered with either party," in a story about Green Bay's independent and swing-voter politics. https://www.wbez.org/eight-forty-eight/2008/09/30/green-bay-voters-may-not-be-as-swinging-as-you-think

Given WP:BLP, WP:V, and WP:BLPCAT, should the infobox party field and be removed unless the article body includes a reliable source directly supporting personal party affiliation and explaining that this was not his official mayoral ballot or office designation?

A possible neutral resolution would be:

• leave the infobox party field blank or omit it;
• remove unless consensus finds the category is sufficiently supported;
• keep the article's sourced statement that Green Bay mayoral elections were nonpartisan.

I welcome neutral editor review. Rauglothgor (talk) 19:04, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Done - If it's added back with a reliable source that will be another matter, but at present party affiliation is unmentioned in the article and thus unsourced, so it should not be in the infobox or categories especially for a BLP. Thank you for disclosing your COI and using the edit request process. Zzz plant (talk) 06:01, 17 July 2026 (UTC)